Attitudes and concerns of doctors and nurses about using a translation application for in-hospital brief interactions with Korean patients

Karen Jean Day, Nicole Song

Abstract


Background: New Zealand is becoming more ethnically diverse, with rising numbers of people with limited English language proficiency. Consequently, hospital interactions are increasing where patients have insufficient English to communicate adequately with doctors or nurses for appropriate, effective, and safe care. Translation technology is rapidly evolving, but evidence is limited regarding its usefulness to clinicians.

Objective: To examine the acceptability to doctors and nurses of a translation application (app) used on a tablet, in brief interactions with Korean patients.

Method: An app was developed to facilitate brief conversations between patients and clinicians as part of clinical care. We used the Technology Acceptance Model 2 to develop semi-structured interview questions for 15 junior and senior doctors and nurses in an urban hospital. Participants used the app to interact with the interviewer as part of a scenario. The interviews were analysed thematically.

Results: The app was easy to use, learn to use, and to memorise for future use. It was considered useful for everyday brief interactions, urgent situations where there is no time to call an interpreter, and after hours, to augment the work of interpreters. Subject to perceived usefulness, there appears to be little need for social normalisation of a translation app, other than management support for the costs, maintenance, and implementation of the app for everyday use.  

Conclusion: Guidelines are required for the use of a translation app by doctors and nurses to augment the interpreter role. A larger study and future research on the patient’s perspective are required. 


Keywords


Sociotechnical; translation; usefulness; ease of use; social influence; clinician

Full Text:

PDF HTML

References


Statistics New Zealand. 2013 Census QuickStats about culture and identity 2014. Available from: www.stats.govt.nz

Black S, Butler R, Dunbar L and Wheeler A. Evaluation of Waitemata District Health Board Child Disability Service Project for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Families. Auckland, New Zealand: Clinical Research & Resource Centre, Waitemata DHB, 2011.

Street RL, Makoul G, Arora NK and Epstein RM. How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician–patient communication to health outcomes. Patient Education and Counseling 2009;74(3):295–301. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.11.015. PMid:19150199.

Flores G. The impact of medical interpreter services on the quality of health care: a systematic review. Medical Care Research and Review 2005;62(3):255–99. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077558705275416. PMid:15894705.

Karliner LS, Jacobs EA, Chen AH and Mutha S. Do professional interpreters improve clinical care for patients with limited English proficiency? A systematic review of the literature. Health Services Research 2007;42(2):727–54. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00629.x. PMid:17362215; PMCid:PMC1955368.

Gray B, Hilder J and Stubbe M. How to use interpreters in general practice: the development of a New Zealand toolkit. Journal of Primary Health Care 2012;4(1):52–61. PMid:22377550.

Ho A. Using family members as interpreters in the clinical setting. Journal of Clinical Ethics 2008;19(3):223–33. PMid:19004432.

Flores G. Language barriers to health care in the United States. New England Journal of Medicine 2006;355(3):229–31. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp058316. PMid:16855260.

Haith-Cooper M. Mobile translators for non-English-speaking women accessing maternity services. British Journal of Midwifery 2014;22(11):795–803.

Nguyen-Lu N, Reide P and Yentis S. ‘Do you have a stick in your mouth?’–use of Google Translate as an aid to anaesthetic pre-assessment. Anaesthesia 2010;65(1):96–97. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2009.06184_4.x.

Sreekanth G. The use of Google language tools as an interpretation aid in cross-cultural doctor–patient interaction: a pilot study. Informatics in Primary Care 2010;18(2):141–43.

Soller RW, Chan P and Higa A. Performance of a new speech translation device in translating verbal recommendations of medication action plans for patients with diabetes. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology 2012;6(4):927–37. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/193229681200600426. PMid:22920821; PMCid:PMC3440166.

Taicher BM, Alam RI, Berman J and Epstein RH. Design, implementation, and evaluation of a computerized system to communicate with patients with limited native language proficiency in the perioperative period. Anesthesia & Analgesia 2011;112(1):106–12. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182009cd1. PMid:21081767.

Somers HL, Caress A-L, Evans DG, Johnson MJ, Lovel HJ and Mohamed Z. A computer-based aid for communication between patients with limited English and their clinicians, using symbols and digitised speech. International Journal of Medical Informatics 2008;77(8):507–17. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2007.10.007. PMid:18061536.

Holden RJ and Karsh B. The technology acceptance model: its past and its future in health care. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 1020;43:159–72. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2009.07.002.

Liang J, Day K and McFarlane R (Ed). ‘Listen Please’ - a clinical translation application. HINZ 2013 Conference and Exhibition (Rotorua, New Zealand, 27–29 Nov), 2013.

Morse JM. Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research 2015;25(9):1212–22. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501. PMid:26184336.

Muller JH. Narrative approaches to qualitative research in primary care. Doing Qualitative Research 1999;2:221–38.

Diamond LC, Schenker Y, Curry L, Bradley EH and Fernandez A. Getting by: underuse of interpreters by resident physicians. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2009;24(2):256–62. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0875-7. PMid:19089503; PMCid:PMC2628994

Waitemata District Health Board. WATIS Interpreting Service 2015 [updated 2015]. Available from: Available at: http://www.asianhealthservices.co.nz/Watis-Interpreting-Service. Accessed 4 October 2016.

Damodaran L, Olphert C and Sandhu J. Falling off the bandwagon? Exploring the challenges to sustained digital engagement by older people. Gerontology 2013;60(2):163–73. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1159/000357431. PMid:24356488.

Chau PY and Hu PJ. Examining a model of information technology acceptance by individual professionals: an exploratory study. Journal of Management Information Systems 2002;18(4):191–229. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.11045699.

Albrecht U-V, Behrends M, Schmeer R, Matthies HK and von Jan U. Usage of multilingual mobile translation applications in clinical settings. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 2013;1(1):e4. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.2268.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14236/jhi.v24i3.916

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


This is an open access journal, which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or their institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal starting from Volume 21 without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open accessFor permission regarding papers published in previous volumes, please contact us.

Privacy statement: The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

Online ISSN 2058-4563 - Print ISSN 2058-4555. Published by BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT